Between Two Worlds

LaTonya Taylor at CT Movies reviews the new film, The Gospel. Here's a summary:

This well-done spin on the Parable of the Prodigal Son is a nice change of pace from other recent films that satirize African Americans and the church. Oh, and there's some terrific gospel music too.

And here's her conclusion:

All in all, The Gospel is a more-than-fine movie—the kind of movie Christians who like to complain about Hollywood should support, and the kind of film that may also appeal to people who aren't interested in church. There are real, developed characters here, a number of interesting storylines, resolutions that are realistic and faith affirming, and a lot of good music.

...I can't speak for others, but I really want an originalist. If I could be assured that an atheist would be an originalist, that would be fine with me. If an evangelical nominee wanted to put in the Constitution what's not there, I'd oppose him or her. I'm glad Miers is a conservative evangelical, because if her goal is to please Christ she is far less likely than someone without that compass to have the goal of pleasing academic and media liberals. But once the lifetime appointment is gained, there are no guarantees -- regardless of paper trail, track record, or anything else." (World Mag Blog)

Yesterday NY Post opinion columnist John Podhoretz referred to this speech by President Bush as "one of the most important presidential addresses of our time." Today he wrote in his column:

This speech, one of the longest and most detailed of his presidency, is so rich and nuanced that it can't be done justice in this space. Do yourself a favor and go to whitehouse.gov and read the whole thing.

It is the signal rhetorical accomplishment of his second term, and unmistakable evidence that despite its recent political troubles, the Bush administration remains steadfast and implacable on the need to secure victory in Iraq for the sake of the security of the United States and the West.

When the conference is over, I'll provide an outline and some key quotes. I strongly encourage you to read it.

Some of you will recall that one of my rules of life is not to make George Will mad at me. Now I have a similar rule with regard to Charles Krauthammer. He and Will have achieved a rare level of criticisms per page. See Krauthammer's latest today in the Washington Post: Withdraw This Nominee.

For a different perspective, see Hugh Hewitt's: "Gentleman, I Am a Party Man."

And also see Marvin Olaskys' cover story for World: Blessed Are the Meek: For They (Or at Least One of Them) Shall Inherit a Supreme Court Seat. Olasky--who seems to support Ms. Miers' nomination--closes his article in this way: "If President Bush and supporters of the Miers nomination are wrong, the Supreme Court won't change but the Republican Party will, as millions of conservatives see GOP rule as shameful and look elsewhere for leadership."

On Saturday night at the Desiring God Conference, Steve Saint will speak on suffering and missions.

Stan Guthrie, over at CT Movies, reviews the new documentary on DVD, Beyond the Gates of Splendor, which is narrated by Steve and tells the story of his father and four other missionaries in Ecuador. "This documentary, telling the true story of five American missionaries murdered on a remote sandbar in Ecuador half a century ago, explodes the myth of the noble savage. But it doesn't stop there, showing through interviews with the five widows, two anthropologists, and numerous Waodani Indians the spiritual and social transformation of a murderous 'stone age' tribe."

If you're interested, "Beyond the Gates of Splendor is now available on DVD at ChristianBook.com. A feature film about the 1956 events, End of the Spear, will release to theaters nationwide in January."

From a new report:

According to Abbas, immediately thereafter Bush said: "God told me to strike at al Qaida and I struck them, and then he instructed me to strike at Saddam, which I did, and now I am determined to solve the problem in the Middle East. If you help me I will act, and if not, the elections will come and I will have to focus on them."

Sorry; I'm not buying it. I don't think President Bush--contrary to the impression painted by his opponents--thinks or speaks this way.

Update: "That's absurd. He's never made such comments," White House spokesman Scott McClellan said Thursday.

Ligon Duncan helpfully summarizes Sinclair Ferguson's message on the New Perspective(s) on Paul. Dr. Duncan says that he can't recommend it too highly.

Given that the promising-but-ultimately-disappointing Discerning Reader has now closed shop, check out MonergismBooks.com as a one-stop shop for good, reliable, God-centered books.

The Desiring God National Conference--Suffering and the Sovereignty of God--will begin tomorrow night. Tim Challies and Doug McHone will be live-blogging the conference. So check their sites this weekend if you're interested.

I know that everyone at DG and all of the speakers would deeply appreciate your prayers. Many of us have the sense that this will be a very significant conference. A number of the speakers not only have a profound theology of suffering, but are currently dealing with various kinds of pain and suffering in their own lives.

I would appreciate your prayers for Friday night. After John Piper gives the opening address, the final session of the evening will involve me interviewing him for an hour. If you had my role and had the chance to ask him anything you wanted about suffering and the sovereignty of God, what would you ask? (Obviously I can't guarantee that I'll ask him what you suggest, but I'd be interested to hear your thoughts on this.)

Thanks!

Melinda Penner asks:

Do you have a reason for the hope within you? Do you have a reason to give when asked by a family member or coworker why Christianity is true? Do you have a reason to give when a critic challenges the rationality of Christianity? Do you have a reason to give when you question and doubt?

You'll have an unusual opportunity to hear plenty of reasons from a long line-up of Christian teachers, apologists, and scholars who will teach on some of the most challenging issues facing Christians. Frank Beckwith, Ben Witherington III, William Lane Craig, Garry Habermas, Paul Copan, Greg Koukl, Craig Evans, Michael Murray, and many more will be teaching on their specialties. Also scheduled is a special youth track of workshops taught by Sean McDowell and Brett Kunkle, both experienced youth workers.

BranchCreek Community Church, the Evangelical Philosophical Society, and Stand to Reason are hosting the Reason for the Hope Within conference outside of Philadelphia next month. The cost is very reasonable for a three-day schedule to make it as accessible as possible. There's an early registration discount to take advantage of soon.

Hope to see you there.

Anthony Carter--author of On Being Black and Reformed: A New Perspective on the African-American Christian Experience--is blogging at Non Nobis Domine [Not unto us, O Lord!]. Check it out.

Here are some strange airport sightings I've had in recent days:

1. I met Keifer Sutherland (star of "24" and the movie "To End All Wars") at LAX Airport. He kindly gave me an autograph. Later we were waiting in line together for our food from Burger King. The service was really slow. I couldn't think of anything else to say, so I said: "So much for fast food." His response: "Yeah, they kind of took the fast part out of it."

2. Ben Stein (the guy who says "Bueller, Bueller" in "Ferris Bueller's Day Off") was on my flight. Unlike Keifer, we had no fascinating conversations.

3. While in line at Starbucks, the gal behind the counter was staring at me. She asked me if I was Jerod from the Subway commercials. (Sigh.)

Update: Typo corrected. Thanks Anoninva--I need an editor!

Today is Jonathan Edwards' 302nd birthday.

It's exciting to hear about this new website: Reformed Blacks of America.

Here's their statement of purpose:

God addresses His people as a collective whole in various ways such as “bride”, “church” and “elect”. It is with a similar sense of love and devotion to the Christian community that this project was born. With respect, affection and fear of God, we naturally desire to see His people edified and encouraged, and in like manner we also believe the Christian life is lived not in a vacuum or in isolation but amongst a community of believers. It is with zeal and interest that we seek to commune with God’s people so that we do learn more about Him and further the kingdom of God together.

At this time in history, we believe it is vital to affirm and support the Reformed Christian community in every possible venue. As God blesses His people with a wonderful outpouring of love and truth, this website has been established in order to support and emphasize the necessity and growth of the community of Reformed Blacks. As we work toward a mutual fulfillment of the will of God, it will become readily apparent that one of our greatest catalysts for study and growth is also a primary supporter of our faith and hope, believers in community. Moreover, as we individually grow and mature, so must we grow and mature together. As we continue studying Scripture to discern its meaning, so is its meaning enhanced and its significance increased through our relationships not only with God, but with one another. So we must relearn the phrase “never alone” and include not only God, but our brothers and sisters in Christ as well.

We also believe if there is a such thing as a “Black Reformed” movement, it cannot effectively grow and develop divorce from this "Black Reformed" community. Hence, we want to be a catalyst for this movement and a communal hub as it continues to take shape. It is one of our goals to connect you with other Black Reformed believers whom you may not otherwise meet on your own because all of us need one another to truly be all of who God want us to be. From such, we desire to impact broadly Black evangelical communities and churches as well. Therefore, we have a particular affection and calling to the local church. We desire to see it grow in truth, number and devotion to God.

Furthermore, this website is in support of the local church and in the future will take particular interest in increasing communication and relationships among churches. We also have a special interest in instructing students for Christ, which will include content and concept driven material for them as well.

And here they describe their Liaison Project:

The Church Liaison Project was formed based on our desire to see the Reformed Black community grow and develop in a more intimate fashion. We plan to accomplish this by connecting with young adults between the ages of approximately 20-32 who fill these churches because they are and will be the future of this Reformed Black community. This also provides us the opportunity to form lasting relationships with the churches with whom we partner.

Just as Christ has ordained the local church as the main catalyst to grow his kingdom throughout the world, we believe this basis of growth among such a community is developed principally within and in aid of his church. Therefore, we desire to increase the communication, fellowship and encouragement in this community of believers. With such goals, our efforts are concentrated in fostering authentic and transparent communication and interaction with the people at these churches. Hence, we strongly believe that a call to Christ is a call to community.

If you would like to participate in our Church Liaison Project or want to receive more information, email us at info@ReformedBlacksOfAmerica.org with "Church Liaison Project" as the subject of the email.

(HT: Phil Ryken)

George Will:

"The president's ``argument'' for her amounts to: Trust me. There is no reason to, for several reasons.

He has neither the inclination nor the ability to make sophisticated judgments about competing approaches to construing the Constitution. Few presidents acquire such abilities in the course of their prepresidential careers, and this president, particularly, is not disposed to such reflections.

Furthermore, there is no reason to believe that Miers' nomination resulted from the president's careful consultation with people capable of such judgments. If 100 such people had been asked to list 100 individuals who have given evidence of the reflectiveness and excellence requisite in a justice, Miers' name probably would not have appeared in any of the 10,000 places on those lists.

...It is important that Miers not be confirmed unless, in her 61st year, she suddenly and unexpectedly is found to have hitherto undisclosed interests and talents pertinent to the court's role. Otherwise the sound principle of substantial deference to a president's choice of judicial nominees will dissolve into a rationalization for senatorial abdication of the duty to hold presidents to some standards of seriousness that will prevent them from reducing the Supreme Court to a private plaything useful for fulfilling whims on behalf of friends.

The wisdom of presumptive opposition to Miers' confirmation flows from the fact that constitutional reasoning is a talent -- a skill acquired, as intellectual skills are, by years of practice sustained by intense interest. It is not usually acquired in the normal course of even a fine lawyer's career. The burden is on Miers to demonstrate such talents, and on senators to compel such a demonstration or reject the nomination.

Under the rubric of ``diversity'' -- nowadays, the first refuge of intellectually disreputable impulses -- the president announced, surely without fathoming the implications, his belief in identity politics and its tawdry corollary, the idea of categorical representation. Identity politics holds that one's essential attributes are genetic, biological, ethnic or chromosomal -- that one's nature and understanding are decisively shaped by race, ethnicity or gender. Categorical representation holds that the interests of a group can only be understood, empathized with and represented by a member of that group.

The crowning absurdity of the president's wallowing in such nonsense is the obvious assumption that the Supreme Court is, like a legislature, an institution of representation. This from a president who, introducing Miers, deplored judges who ``legislate from the bench.''

Michelle Malkin: "...asking conservatives to trust that the blank-slate Miers not only has well-formed views on everything from property rights, the individual right to bear arms and the proper scope of privacy rights, to the Commerce Clause, racial preferences and presidential authority in wartime -- but also has the intellectual candlepower to persuade her potential colleagues -- based on little more than her Sunday refreshment-retrieving abilities is asking way too much."

From Dr. Mohler's blog:

How should we think about Harriet Miers as a nominee for the Supreme Court? Some thoughts:

Negative:

1. She is relatively unknown. There is no public record of judicial decisions, written opinions, or published writings from which we can draw a conclusion about her judicial philosophy or convictions on issues of current debate and concern. Indeed, we may know less about Harriet Miers than about any recent nominee to the nation's highest court.

2. She has no judicial experience. Though her legal career has been outstanding and nationally recognized, she had never served as a judge at any level.

3. Her background is unconventional. Unlike most recent nominees to the Supreme Court, she is not a graduate of an Ivy League law school (or a law school with a top ranking, such as Stanford University or the University of Chicago). Her law degree is from the law school of Southern Methodist University in Dallas. She also did not serve a clerkship with a Supreme Court justice (as John Roberts served with the late Chief Justice William Rehnquist).

4. She was recommended by Senator Reid. Numerous press accounts indicate that Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid [D-NV] recommended Harriet Miers in a conversation with the President. Given Sen. Reid's well-established ideas concerning the Supreme Court, this must give conservatives pause, at the very least.

Positive:

1. Some of what we are learning about Harriet Miers is genuinely encouraging. She has been identified as an evangelical Christian with deep Christian commitments. Ms. Miers is a member of Valley View Christian Church in Dallas where Dr. Barry McCarty is pastor. Southern Baptists will recognize Dr. McCarty through his service as parliamentarian at recent meetings of the Southern Baptist Convention. I know him well, and I know that this is a conservative church. Those who know her speak of her with great admiration and confidence.

2. Her background is unconventional. This is a positive factor as well as a potential negative in some eyes. In the positive sense, this means that Harriet Miers is not a product of the tight and relatively insulated world of legal scholarship and the judiciary. Her real-world experience in litigation, management, church, and life means that she is less likely to fall prey to the "inside the beltway" syndrome.

3. Her legal experience is stellar. Though she has never sat on the bench as a judge, she is one of the nation's most recognized lawyers. She served as the first woman president of the Dallas Bar Association and later served as president of the State Bar of Texas. She had been nominated to the second-highest office in the American Bar Association when she withdrew from the election to accept appointment to the White House staff. She served as chair of the ABA's Commission on Multijurisdictional Practice. The National Law Journal named her as one of the nation's 100 most powerful attorneys and of the top 50 women lawyers in America. She has now served for several years as a senior member of the White House staff.

4. She has been a major player in President Bush's judicial nominations. Harriet Miers has been responsible for advising the President on judicial nominations to all federal courts, including the nomination of John Roberts as Chief Justice. By all accounts, President Bush's nominees reflect her vision of the courts and the Constitution. This is most encouraging.

5. She was nominated by someone who knows her very well -- President George W. Bush. Conservatives who have long been troubled by the courts are always (justifiably) concerned that every new nominee is another David H. Souter. In other words, another nominee represented as a conservative who, once on the bench, turns out to be another judicial activist. There are two reasons why this is not likely to be a good analogy in this case. In the first place, President George H. W. Bush had no personal knowledge of David Souter when he nominated him to the Supreme Court in 1990. President George W. Bush has known Harriet Miers for over a decade and has worked with her closely. As the President made clear in his remarks yesterday, he knows Harriet Miers very well, and he trusts her heart. Given the fact that she worked so closely with the President on judicial appointments, this is a significant positive factor. Secondly, President Bush has established a track-record of outstanding judicial nominations at every level, even as he has articulated a vision of judicial philosophy and constitutional interpretation that should give us confidence. As I see it, the President deserves our support for this nomination unless clear evidence should indicate otherwise. I do not expect any such evidence to appear.

Some lament that potential nominees like Michael Luttig and Michael McConnell were not chosen. I understand, appreciate, and share their concern. We should all lament that we are living in a political context which makes the nomination of outstanding conservative jurists like these all but impossible. The only way to change this situation is to change the political context -- and that is no small challenge. There is much work to do and much ground to recover.

For now, we await the confirmation hearings for Harriet Miers and the 110th justice of the U.S. Supreme Court. Her nomination deserves our support and close attention.

Matthew Westerholm has posted a number of online audio links to sermons and lectures by Sinclair Ferguson.

I confess to disappointment upon hearing that Harriet Miers is President Bush's pick to replace Justice O'Connor. The disappointment is that she's an unknown--and therefore could become like so many other Republican appointees. Hugh Hewitt disagrees:

Harriet Miers isn't a Justice Souter pick, so don't be silly. It is a solid, B+ pick. The first President Bush didn't know David Souter, but trusted Chief of Staff Sunnunu and Senator Rudman. The first President Bush got burned badly because he trusted the enthusiams of others.

The second President Bush knows Harriet Miers, and knows her well. The White House Counsel is an unknown to most SCOTUS observors, but not to the president, who has seen her at work for great lengths of years and in very different situations, including as an advisor in wartime.

(Read the whole thing: Do You Trust Him?)

But my question for Hugh is: Didn't conservatives trust Ronald Reagan, too? And he gave us Sandra Day O'Connor.

Update: Most succinct analysis:

This nominee is a two-fer -- she would not have been selected but for her gender, and she would not have been selected but for her status as a Bush crony. So instead of a 50-year old conservative experienced jurist we get a 60-year old with no judicial experience who may or may not be conservative. (Powerline)

Update: Bill Kristol:

I'M DISAPPOINTED, depressed and demoralized.

I'm disappointed because I expected President Bush to nominate someone with a visible and distinguished constitutionalist track record--someone like Maura Corrigan, Alice Batchelder, Edith Jones, Priscilla Owen, or Janice Rogers Brown--to say nothing of Michael Luttig, Michael McConnell, or Samuel Alito. Harriet Miers has an impressive record as a corporate attorney and Bush administration official. She has no constitutionalist credentials that I know of.

I'm depressed. Roberts for O'Connor was an unambiguous improvement. Roberts for Rehnquist was an appropriate replacement. But moving Roberts over to the Rehnquist seat meant everything rode on this nomination--and that the president had to be ready to fight on constitutional grounds for a strong nominee. Apparently, he wasn't. It is very hard to avoid the conclusion that President Bush flinched from a fight on constitutional philosophy. Miers is undoubtedly a decent and competent person. But her selection will unavoidably be judged as reflecting a combination of cronyism and capitulation on the part of the president.

I'm demoralized. What does this say about the next three years of the Bush administration--leaving aside for a moment the future of the Court? Surely this is a pick from weakness. Is the administration more broadly so weak? What are the prospects for a strong Bush second term? What are the prospects for holding solid GOP majorities in Congress in 2006 if conservatives are demoralized? And what elected officials will step forward to begin to lay the groundwork for conservative leadership after Bush?